Posted on 04/11/2014 6:43:06 AM PDT by xzins
BYERS, Texas (RFD-TV) Most people think the border between Texas and Oklahoma is the Red River. Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated than that, especially along the part of the river where Tommy Henderson and his family ranch. Henderson lost a lawsuit 30 years ago that moved part of the northern Texas border over a mile to the south.
The Bureau of Land Management [BLM] took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.
Now, they want to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the river.
“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,” Henderson explained.
BLM, which oversees public land in the United States, claims this land never belonged to Texas.
The Texas landowners who have lived and cared for that land for hundreds of years beg to differ.
BLM plans on taking the land anyway. Property owners will be forced to spend money on lawsuits to keep what is theirs.
For many, that property has been in their family for generations.
"How can BLM come in and say, "Hey, this isn't yours." Even though it’s patented from the state, you've always paid taxes on it. Our family has paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We've got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn't ours," said Henderson.
Ever since the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, there has been controversy over where Oklahoma ends and Texas begins.
In layman’s terms the boundary is the vegetation line on the south side of the Red River.
Over time the river moves. This movement north toward Oklahoma is the sticking point.
The sandy soils erode in a process called accretion, which wipes out the bank. So the property line follows the river.
BLM claims that the river moved by another process called avulsion. With avulsion, the land may be changed by flood or currents, but the property line isn’t. So BLM claims that when the river moved back north the property line stayed put.
It doesn’t help that Oklahoma defines avulsion differently than Texas and the U.S.
“Originally, here the river was out there where it is now and it eroded and accreted up to here, and then it eroded and accreted back. Well, their interpretation is that it eroded up to here but avulsed back. So when you listen to them it is always erosion to the south because the property line follows it then, but it’s always avulsion when it goes north. So the boundary can move south but it can never move back north," said Henderson.
About 90,000 acres could be seized by BLM, disappearing across a new state line. If they are allowed to take the land, it could also affect farmers and ranchers down river like Scott Carpenter, who ranches north of Nocona.
BLM couldn’t take his land, but there would be nothing to stop his neighbor across the river from claiming some of Scott’s property belongs to him. That is just one of the reasons Carpenter wants to help.
"We have numerous places that have been in our family for over a hundred of years, and you hate to see land that people’s worked hard for would lose,” said Carpenter. “As producers we are always on a defense. We have to make decisions to try to help ourselves to help one another."
Both ranchers have been in contact with U.S. Congressman Mac Thornberry, who is working to help stop the land grab. Henderson’s land probably won’t be affected this time, but he’s hoping what happened to him won’t happen to his fellow landowners.
This report is from our partners at the Texas Farm Bureau.
ping!
Exactly. It’s either part of Texas or part of Oklahoma, it is not part of the BLM.
River movements happen all the time on state boundaries and they are worked out by the courts. I know this because Iowa has three rivers that form it’s boundaries and they have won court cases when the river shifted.
What legal right does the BLM have if there is no federal lands in question here?
“How can BLM come in and say, “Hey, this isn’t yours.”
Easy they come in with heavily armed goons and say “hey this isn’t yours”.
Having a lot of "smaller" issues makes it harder for the people focus on them, and pull themselves away from the Idiot Box (TV) and their favorite show.
Having a major event, would cause a lot more people to sit up and possibly rally. Just look at the overwhelming sense of unity that happened on 9/11. It take a week or so for some to resort back to their brain dead ways, but I'm sure they'd probably prefer to not any sense of unity at all.
Also, smaller events are easier to make it seem like it is just a fringe element.
I'm guessing that the feds claim the shore line of any navigable body of water. And once claimed they do not give up the claim even if the shore line moves. Below is the money quote from the article.
"Originally, here the river was out there where it is now and it eroded and accreted up to here, and then it eroded and accreted back. Well, their interpretation is that it eroded up to here but avulsed back. So when you listen to them it is always erosion to the south because the property line follows it then, but it’s always avulsion when it goes north. So the boundary can move south but it can never move back north," said Henderson."
I know Iowa is bordered by the Missouri, Missisippi, and Des Moines. The Army Core of Engineers is in charge of the lock and dam systems, and barge navigation, but the states own the territory.
Sounds like the BLM is doing is making a claim on some 30 year old court case, not an Act of Congress or any law passed thereby. Their mission is not the land acquisition business, it’s the land management business. They are beyond their mission: rogue, lawless, predatory, and terroristic. However, I’m sure the courts will side with them.
They actively want Middle Americans to kill other Middle Americans.
Well perhaps someone can explain on what basis the BLM is claiming the land. I took my best shot, sadly it appears I was off target. lol
I think you’re right. Rivers are already public, but they want to control the land access to rivers....water.
Interesting
Another possibility is that they just want to take what they think they can get away with taking.
They would love a crisis
Yes, then they could crack down. The bottom-up, top-down strategy.
Both of your eyes are wide open! Not many see the truth for what it is.
This has been a problem on the Mississippi forever. There are islands that jump from one state to the other as the current changes.
But this is the first time that I know of that the BLM is involved. The feds’ involvement is all part of Agenda 21.
The BLM is poking a bear when they mess with Texas.
They have Abrams tanks and Apache helicopters and aren't afraid to use them against citizens.
Think about Waco.
“Don’t Mess With Texas!”
What goes with BLM is that the Chicoms are now calling in all the debt money that Obama and his minions/enablers were able to draw on to become millionaires. These Chinese entrepreneurs are very anxious to get land in the USA and there are plenty of so called citizens willing to shill for them. There needs to be a very deep look at the likes of Las Vegas money people who some like Addelson are willing to sell out the USA. This story is like an iceberg.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.